Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

The value of privacy

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

[link to article on my blog]

The value of privacy

Would you have a problem living in a house with glass walls? How about having all your conversations audible to all who are interested?

Most people, if not all, would find it very disturbing.

Why is it that people care so much about other eyes and other ears invading their space? Is it a weakness that needs to be overcome? An indication that one is not confident enough or that one does not have an independent mind?

Is it because one is ashamed of certain things and wants to deceive the world or hide one's identity?

No - to all of those. Not as the general answer to the question of the value of privacy.

Privacy is required for the protection of one's mental experience from foreign elements that can interfere, damage or destroy it.

I am not talking here of obvious things such as noise or people physically standing in one's way. Obviously, if a place is so crowded as to not allow one to spend time standing comfortably next to someone else or hear what they say, that is a disvalue. To understand the value of privacy as such I eliminate such conditions and concentrate only on the silent presence of the consciousness of other people, similar to how it would be like if your life were recorded and broadcasted over the internet.

So when I say that the presence of the consciousness of others is enough to disturb an experience, that is the sort of situation I am talking about.

In what way, you may ask, can the consciousness of others disturb our mental experience? These people are, in this hypothetical situation, just sitting there.

The answer is that keeping in mind the mental experience of others creates an emotional response which will mix with the emotional response to any experience. For example, suppose you are dancing to a favorite song of yours, you think you are all alone and let yourself loosen up and express your feelings when all of a sudden you spot someone looking at you, smiling. Their expression introduces into your mind a whole different universe than your own - a different way of looking at things, of judging things and feeling about them. So while you may value your dance a lot and see it as something precious, the person you caught looking at you may see it as something silly. While it may be entirely OK with you for someone else to consider something you do silly, at that moment of experiencing your own world so ecstatically, having the emotional view of someone else shoved into your mind is the mental equivalent of a punch to the face. Holding the two sets of emotions at the same time regarding something precious to you is very unpleasant.

In the rare case of having one's world view shared by a stranger the experience of "invasion of privacy" will be significantly reduced. However, in general privacy is a value because one cannot assume that strangers out there in the street share one's view of life or share the understanding of the meaning of one's actions.

Even if one has a fiercely independent mind, sharing one's emotions about a value (like being in love) with someone who would not understand it (or even ridicule it) would be a very unpleasant experience simply because of experiencing colliding emotions simultaneously.

You may ask further, why would anyone consider the experience of someone else? So what if I spotted this person looking at me - do I have to think about their expression? The answer is; yes, we do. We do this automatically.

We don't have to think further of the meaning of the expression we saw, but the initial understanding of what it stands for happens automatically in our subconscious.

Privacy is a value because we can act and pursue our values knowing that our experience will not be disturbed by foreign elements.

This remains true for wanting privacy with someone else. A couple having sex, for example, ideally share each other's world perfectly. Knowing what the other is experiencing is a celebration of one's own experience - an enhancement of it. But if a group of strangers were to gather around in a stadium-like arrangement watching the act, that would introduce a foreign element. Those strangers can never possibly share the mutual understanding the couple has. The content of the crowd's mind is a foreign element that interferes with the concentration on the mind of the partner.

So... does it make sense to share your vulnerable moments and your precious experiences only with your close friends or those you trust would understand it? Yes, it does. Does honesty requires that one broadcasts everything openly to all? It most certainly does not. Honesty as a virtue has its context - and the context is a selfish pursuit of one's values.

[The rest is an attachment or a note]

In light of all of this, I find two more related topics interesting to analyze.

One is artists - especially of the performing arts. Art, unlike other professions, involves an open expression of the artist's emotions, view of life and personality. One can dance or perform mechanically, but to make it good one must open up and express fully one's emotions.

In the performing arts the dancer or actor must do it in front of a live audience. There is no privacy shielding one's inner world from others, save the fact that the setting is such that everyone expects the performer to act this way, and one is necessarily aware that others are watching their actions. I think a good dancer/ actor must therefore have the following two components: 1. The ability to maintain focus on their inner world despite a watching audience. 2. A positive view, as a whole, of the audience.

Without a recognition that somebody out there understands what the performer is doing and can admire it, there would be no motivation to "open up" and offer what one has inside to the world.

Second is pornography. In writing this piece I've come across the question of how come the people who play porn have no problem with the lack of privacy in having sex? The answer is, I believe, that they seek intimacy with a collective, based on a very shallow level of values. When a couple requires privacy it's because they want to guard the mutual understanding that they have about each other, and they want to be admired for those things they understand about each other. When one is having sex with a stranger for all to see - one has no understanding with a partner. Instead what they seek is admiration from a collective - being wanted by an abstraction represented by an unknown collective - based on the value of their physical appearance. They might even project on the crowd whatever values they want to be had for, but there is no need for privacy because in this sort of sex there is nothing to guard. In fact, if somebody shows up that knows the porn star well, that might be what they would want to guard themselves against, because that, ironically, threatens the abstract sexual relationship with people "out there".

____________________________________________

If you liked the article, hopefully you'd consider following my blog (or even donating). To do this you can follow this link and brows the side bar for all the options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You brought up a lot of good points, but I think the primary reason privacy is of value is a bit deeper -- I think it has to do with the fact that an independent consciousness has a primary focus on reality and not others, including not caring too much about what others think of their own values. If one can reach the psychological state whereby one is at one with reality, others become much less important, and as you indicate, the projection of others into our world view becomes an intrusion. If you do something that is of value to you -- say a painting or a poem or a short story, or something else creative -- and others proclaim that it is not of value and smirk at it, one gets the impression that they are smirking at you and belittling you and your world, your sense of life becomes a ridicule and that emotional feeling is so private that it becomes annoying to have others not only not value it but to ridicule it. So it takes a heroic effort to reach the point where others criticizing you and your works of passion only go down so far, as Howard Roark put it in The Fountainhead. That reminds me of that scene in that novel where the young boy comes across one of Roark's buildings in the woods and stops to admire it. That type of admiration is very personal and has to do with one's sense of life, and in such cases, probably even Roark the man would be an intrusion over admiring his works, because that great intensity of a work of art expressing one's sense of life is a uniquely personal experience. Also, in The Fountainhead, Dominique sees Roark as a god, and doesn't understand why others don't see him that way. The intrusion of others into that response would belittle her direct experience of Roark the man being everything she had ever wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You brought up a lot of good points, but I think the primary reason privacy is of value is a bit deeper -- I think it has to do with the fact that an independent consciousness has a primary focus on reality and not others, including not caring too much about what others think of their own values.

That some people care about other people's opinion as a substitution for their own judgment is a different problem, but we must not form a false dichotomy of: either one cares what other people think as a substitution for one's judgment or we we don't focus on what they think of us at all and we are first handed.

Other people are a big part of reality, why should we not focus on them and what they think, how they feel and so on? (especially what they think of us).

When receiving criticism, if we value the source, it makes sense to listen thoroughly and consider it, not to take an approach of "I'm independent therefore I don't care what you think of this". Not sure if this is what you think is ideal, but it seems like it is.

If one can reach the psychological state whereby one is at one with reality, others become much less important, and as you indicate, the projection of others into our world view becomes an intrusion.

OK, this is a weird view. If one is focused on reality and has independent judgment, why would this mean that other people become an intrusion?

Also, this is not always the case... good friends, for example, are not intruding our world view, they share it. So there is no general "people are an intrusion".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...